Patent decision

BL number

O/270/08

Concerning rights in

GB 0404649.6

Hearing Officer

Mr B S Wright

Decision date

3 October 2008

Person(s) or Company(s) involved

Mr Andrew Emery

Provisions discussed

Patents Act 1977 sections 1(1)(b), 14(3), 14(5)

Keywords

Clarity, Inventive step, Sufficiency

Related Decisions

None

Summary

The application relates to a cricket training mat. The mat comprises lines and areas defined in various colours that give feedback to both left and right handed batsmen and bowlers on the line and length of a delivery. Although construing the inventive concept differently to the examiner the hearing officer reached the same final conclusion as the examiner that invention lacked an inventive step over the cited prior art. The hearing officer also upheld the examiner’s objection that the claims were unclear and failed to define the matter for which the applicant sought protection. The hearing officer found that the application did provide an enabling disclosure.

The hearing officer ordered that: (i) in the event of the compliance period not being extended, the application should be treated as refused under section 20(1); (ii) in the event of the compliance period being extended and amendments being filed, the application should be referred back to the examiner for further consideration; (iii) in the event of the compliance period being extended but no amendments being filed, the application should be treated as refused under section 20(1) on expiry of the extended compliance period.